Newspaper Page Text
h y j
! The ferment of a fired, is preferable to the torpor of a despotic, Government. 5
VOL. I.
ATHENS, GEOHOIA, SEPTEMBER 21,1882.
NO. 27.
UoUtecal.
From ike Augusta C>iisliluti?na'isl.
The following is the Circular addressed to
I,h c Candidates for Congress, hy the ( ominittie
lof Correspondence appointed nt the Biehmond
meeting in Augusta, “ it would ho “ extremely I Jefferson and such stnte papers and decisions
langerons” at any time for the pr.opi.F. to fleet
op.LF.GATrs (o meet in contention, and invent
tliem with Jail power to maintain, preserve and
defend, the rights and privileges of the free citi
zens of this State." For I am clearly of opin
ion, the people are folly competent ,to act far
ICountv meeting, on the 18th instant. For ton, tne people r
leach of them, n copy has been directed to His themselves, and may be safely trusted with their
r Post-Office. But as some of those gen-
■proper
It lent an are now travelling, the Committee has
I thought it advisable, to make the pr sent pul.-
llicntion, with a request, that they will accept it
las a substitute, for the formal letters whic h their
lahscence from homo may have prevented them
I from receiving.
AUGUSTA, 20th August, 1822,'
SIR : —Wo address you in the performance
| of a duty imposed on us hy the following Reso
lution, adopted at a Meeting of tho Citizens of
|Richmond county; on tho 18th inst.
» Resolved, That a committee of three, nnmc-
|ly: Col Wm. Cumming, Judge J. P King, and
■Aug. Slaughter, Esq. bo appointed to as-
Icertain, by direct correspondence with the can
own rights, powers and interests, even in
moment of excitement like the presentand
have good sense enough to select persons who
will honestly and faithfully represent their wish
es and feelings.
I believe every unconstitutional law of Con
gress to be null and void, and has no legal force
or obligation, and that each state, has a right to
treat it as a nullity.
I have never entertained a doubt, that the
State of Georgia had the right, to claim all the
Creek lands within her limits, under the treaty
of the Indian Springs, and to treat, as a nullity,
the treaty subsequently made, by which she was
deprived of a part of that land.
I believe that tho State of Georgia had the
right to extend her lows over the Cherokee nn-
con
didates for Congress, and for the Legislature, lion . to ity and execute Tassels ; to try, con-
from this connty, what are their sentiments in yict nn( , 8 ' nten to impr i S o„ m ent in the Peni-
regard to nullification, and to publish such an- j tenfiaryi Worcestcr and Butter, who refused to
swers as may be received. obey the laws of Georgia; and to disregard the
As Members of that Commi tee, we rcspec-j dtr ision of the Supreme Court, and the inter-
tifully request that you will oblige your follow ofthn fr nitcd Slatcs Q3 uncon , lilu .
citizens of Richmond, hy communicating tional and void.
through us, your “ sentiments m regard to mil- j Thn , //(f ^ 0 f Georgia has the right also
llificution.” Their motives wil he: more P r0 P*' t0 mne y and grant the lands in the ChcMec
lorly explained hy t her own acts, than by any nal{on J 0 htr nwn cilism>t in ,^1* of the said
Icominentary of ours; wo have therefore taken hlmome , a nnd //[c Cherokee treaties,
Ithc liberty ot annexing a complete copy of the „, c miud staUl s]wM M , h
■Preamble and resolutions which were adopted ■. vt/d g er ^ g 0)y ‘ 1
by tho meeting.
We have the honor to be, sir, very respectful
ly vour obodient servants,
1 ; WM. GUMMING,
J. P. KING,
AUG. SLAUGHTER,
of our Conn-, which hove any beating upon the
-ubjcct. it has been invariably explcssed, as it
will continue to he, in strong terms, upon all
proper occasions, nnd I will not now forbear
from declaring it to be mv belief, that if the pat
riots and sages who are dead, and whose wri
tings have been cited to establish (lie correct
ness of the doctrine of nullifiication, were alive,
that they would disclaim, as Mr. Madison has
done, that interpretation of their language, which
has been made to aid the introduction into our
system of government, of a novel state action,
as a rcdiess for unconstitutional legislation,
which might result cither i the dissolution of
tho Union, or' in the discnnifituro of a sovereign
stnte, in its pursuit of constitutional rights, by
unconstitutional means.
I am gentlemen,
very respectfully,
your obedient servant,
JAMES M. WAYNE.
Messrs. Cumming, Kingjmd Slaughter.
Athens, August 13, 1832.
To ff m. Camming, J. 1\ King, and Jl. Slaugh
ter, Esqrs.
Gentlemen: I have received from you, as the
organ of n meeting of tho citizens of Richmond
County, a communication accompanied hy their
resolutions, in which a request is mude to know
my “sentiments in regard to Nullification.”
This shall be promptly done. Hut I owe it to
a sense of self respect, as well as of candour to
you, to state, that in tho fuco of your third res
olution, containing a threat to vote against any
candidate who advocates that doctrine, 1 should
certainly have declined a compliance with the
w ishes of your meeting, but for a consideration
much higher than that of appeasing a political
■superfluous to copy-] J proper time for her to call a convention of tion of his country:
I Editors of papers in the ac arc reques c XItE pnopt.F, to consider and adopt the proper! my wish te address
I to give this an insertion. ' -
ANSWERS
|Received by tiic Richmond Com
mittee of Correspondence, on
the subject of Nullification.
Columbus, 25th August, 1832.
Gentlemen,—Your letter of tho 20th August
listen, while perhaps the blood will curdle with fed, or the mutter is now thrown upon the gene-
indignation, nt General Gnino’s despatch td that ral government to take its course.—If it yields,
officer: “ Col. Chambers (said he) with five j the authority of that government has been held
companies of the first, nnd Major Donoho, with ; in perfect contempt and rendered null and raid.
four companies of the fourth regiment of infant-1 If it proceeds then ail tho consequences of revo-
ry, have taken the positions assigned them viz. i lulionary action, anil tho effusion of blood, so
the former nt Marshall’s Ferry, Flint river, nnd much dreaded, in relation to the tariff, must bo
tho latter nt Princeton, Chattahoochee, with in- tho inevitable result.
And I believe tho protective system, (which
has been openly avowed nnd fully recognized 0 _ rr _ r
by a largo majority in the last session of Con-1 denunciation, or essaying to conciliate a doubt-
gross,) to ho unconstitutional; that it should' ful ihvor. It carries no terrors to me. But
have no more force and effect than tho new i the crisis has arrived when every man should
. avw. j treaty, the intercourse-low, or the decision of i speak out holdlv, nnd whatever may be the con-
[Hero follows in the ongina , c ream c the Supreme Court; that Georgia has the same sequences to himscll, to meet them like a man,
land Resolutions referred o, w licit to oug right to treat it as a nullity ; and that this is the and endeavour to savfc if possible the constitu-
|juperfluous to copy.J t j 1 proper time far her to call a convention or I tion of his country: To this end it has been
i the people of Georgia, ns
measures to compel its repeal. I well for tao purpose of arousing thorn to u prop-
“ Under these momentous circumstances, the ersense of their wrongs, as to disabuse their
precise policy, which Georgia should adopt, re- j minds of a carefully lodged prejudice intended
mains to lie determined. But I trust, that what-; to impni that hold on their affections, which I
ever contingencies may arise, she will want. had fondly hoped had been well earned on my struetions corresponding with yours of tho 21st
neither courage to sustain her honour, nor cotm-1 part. Your address has furnished that opportu
ne! to temper her courage. She has no passion nity. As your meeting, doubtless, in a spirit of
for change. She retains tho strongest attach-1 what it conceived to he its rights, has subjected
covering tho rosolutons of tho Richmond meet-' ment to tho system of her adoption. But it her! me to a political catechism under a menace, will
ling, with your request to know my “ sentiments own government wrong her with a had faith, it bo offended, if I, in my turn, without such
fin regard to nulliticution,” has just been rcceiv- j which would not bo endurable in a stranger; if, rigour, seek tu know “ what are their sentiments
led. When culled on by a public meeting of my complaints of our injury, are to be answered hy j in regard” to Mr. Jefferson ns a statesman?
I fellow-citizens, I feel no difficulty in expressing the infliction of a greater; if she is now to be' He has merited, nnd justly received, the titlo of
j my opinion upon any subject of public interest, bullied because she will not submit to be quietly' an Apostle of Freedom. He is the great ora-
I when that subject is presented to me understand- duped; it needs no spirit of divination, to pro-j elo of southern politics. In his opinions every Inline.”
ingly; but it is out of my power to give a specific nounco that the portents are evil. Yet I do not' statesman is safe who has the true nnd proper] What became of the new treaty? Georgia the usual forms of legislation, sanctioned by tl&o
answer, in regard to a matter that 1 do not dis-1 despair. A ease so plain, appeals to tho com-J veneration for civil liberty. Will uny thing he! nullified it. She resisted tho authority of the Executive, nnd Legislative branches of govcm-
tinctiy understand. So many versions and read-. man sense of our countrymen. Georgia sues has said he good authority with your meeting ! general government because its net was uncoil-; ment, hut has been pronounced constitutional
ings have been given to the term '“JVullifica- 1 for no favour, advances no fictitious pretensions If so, then mark his own words, uttered in op-. stilulinnal,und being in the right, though force by tho highest Judicial power, passed all the
' 1 - ‘ r — —»-•*.-—i— • • — 1 was not only threat! nod, hut arrayed, she tri- guards that can give the stamp mid authority of
umphed, and the old treaty was sustained. Fo, law, surely there can ho but little cause to dread
the federal troops marched to Flint river, and a similar opposition to the tariffact founded up-
then marched hack again. This is one, on an equally Hngrunt usurpation. But we are
act of nullification. I understand that the only told they are not similar cases. Let us examine
objection to nullification is, it has a tendency to, this point. Tho intercourse law is founded upon
revolution nnd bloodshed, nnd to bring tho Cede-! that power in tho constitution, which gives to
ral government into contempt. What could so Congress the right tu regulate commerce with the
hy a for ign nation, for as to all ungranted (low
ers it is to these states a completely foreign go
vernment.
The two first positions need no commentary,
the last suggest these reflections. Suppose
Great Britiau should pass an act lor the bene
fit of her manufacturers, to operate in Georgia,
what would the state do? I care not what, hut
whatever was done, precisely that ought to he
done, in relation to the same act passed hy tile
federal government, tin tile right is wholly’ and
absolutely usurped in both eases. If Foutli-
arolina, our neighboring state, were to pass
such a taw, every body would see its absurdity,
and Georgia would nullify it in an instant) then
where is the difference between one state nnd
twenty-three states.' Where is the difference
between the northern states doing this thing,
in their separate state legislatures, or, under the
pretence of constitutional authority, combining
and meeting in the halls of Congress for the
same purpose, if both methods be equnllly out
of the pale of the constitution? Why should
we not as readily resist nnd usurped act of the
general government as that of any other gov
ernment ? There is no reason for it, nnd in four
distinct cases has the State of Georgia applied,
as Mr. Jefferson calls it, this rightful i:eme-
DV.
May I again respectfully ask your meeting,
“ what are its sentiments in regard to Govern
or Troup’s political principles? Ho says,“what
ever a state does in its sovereign capacity, will
bo right” Acting upon this principle, in 1825,
when tho general government attempted to an
nuli tho old, hy what was called the netr treaty
he solemnly declared it should not be done, stil
ted boldly that he “ would cinplriy all the limit
ed means in his power to prevent it” and order
ed the Hancock troop of horse to hold them
selves in readiness. What stronger “ revolu-
tionarij tendency” could any measures exhibit ?
But this was not ell, the Secretary of War or
dered troops into the nntion to overawe the state,
L. Slat/ s,) would he the usurpation of a power
nevergranted by the states.” And what wns to be
Ihe remedy in such cases of usurpation! Hear
ken to the Governor; “Such an attempt, whenev
er made, will challenge tho most determined re
sistance, and if persevered in, will evidently even
tuate in the annihilation of our beloved country.
But was this all lie said ? No 1 The best evi
dence of his firmness yet remains, and is in ex
act accordance with that of Governor Troup:—
“ In exercising (continued he) tho authority of
tlmt department of the Government which de
volves on me, 1 will DISREGARD ALL UN
CONSTITUTIONAL REQUISITIONS OF
WHATEVER CHARACTER OR ORIGIN
THEY MAY BE, and to tho best of my ability,
will protect and defend tho rights of tho State,
and use the means allurdcd me, to maintnin its
laws and constitution.” These are principles
every way worthy of a Statesman, and such as
every man should he proud, much less afraid, to
avow. But let us mark {(ye issue of this mission
ary ease, and here I must ask again, “what aro
the sentiments of your meeting in regard” to
tho Missionaries? When I affirmed in Congress
thnt “ before the Missionaries would ho taken
trom the Penitentiary hy virtue of the decision
of the supreme court, Georgia would became a
how ling wilderness,” a letter from tile city of
Augusta, the place where your meeting was
held, informed the Editor of the National Intel
ligencer, that I did nut speak the scntimentB of
the people of Georgia.. Now I had overy reason
to suppose he formed iiis opinion upon tho views
of his neighbors, if he spoke the truth; and if
so, tho political opinions of that city are at vari
ance with the rest of the good people of Georgia,
lor the information thus given hy tho Augusta
letter has, in all its parts, been wholly uncon
firmed. And this induced me to fear that there
might bo an interest in that flourishing city, not
altogether in unison witii the good southern feel
ing of the rest of the state. Be this as it may,
the decision of the supreme court has bcenmrm-
of lost month.” Did this alarm Governor Troup?
Let me bring to your recollection that patriot’s
reply to Mr. Adams; “The Legislature of Geor
gia, will, at its first meeting, he advised to re
sist any effort which may he mndo to wrest
from tho state the territory acquired hy thnt
treaty and no matter hy what authority thnt ef
fort he made. If the legislature fail to vindicate
that right, the responsibility will bo theirs, not
Tho decision purports to ho founded upon tho
intercourse law passed hy Congress in 1802, to
regulate trade with the Indians, and also upon
the solemn Treaties of tho United States, de
clared hy the constitution to be the supreme law
of tho land, Now it is resisted hy tho State of
Georgia, upon tne ground (hat tho law and tho
Treaties are unconstitutional.
What is the plain and fair inference to be
drawn from this ease ? If a state con rightfully
resist a law which lias not only gone through
tion,” thnt I do not know in what sense, it is in- J of-yesterdny ; she contends for rights alone— j position to Ihe Sedition Law, one not more un
tended to bo used hy tho meeting; nnd would, rights coeval with tho republic, and emblazoned constitutional than the tarifl’act. “When (said
prefer postponing a reply, till I could bo cor-
J rcetly informed. Lest, however, 1 may be sub-
[ joctcd to the imputation of attempting unneces-
i sary delay, hy wniting till I could receive that
in the rights of its birth. Let the sober wisdom this great man) pow ers are assumed, which
of tho nation, ponder on her claims, unbiassed have not been delegated, a NULLIFICATION
hy tho flippancy of past fanaticism, or the astute • of the ACT is the R1GI1TFUL REMEDY :
A l i j u ■ 'im...» vvrnv a'p anw .. wiTtmiT
follies of scholastic jurisprudence.
Under such
information, I will endeavour, so far as I am able, i correction, all may yet bo well. But if this
to comply with that request, and proceed to give last hope is to fail; if Georgia is indeed pro
scribed ; if insulting lyrraimy, marking her for a
victim, presents to her option, the sole alterna
tive of danger or degredation—Speak tombs of
tho Revolution ! For you can proclaim her
choice!”
My opinions and feelings, have been well ex
pressed by “ Oglethorpe,” in the proceeding pa-
sulting from tho compact to which the States are! ragrnph. I do not desire to go farther. If these
parties, as limited by the plain sense and inten- j opinions subject mo to tho charge of “ nullifica
tion of tho instrument constituting the compact, tion,” I nra willing to abide the consequences,
and as no furthor valid, than they are authoris- j They arc dearer to me than any office of the
cd hy the grant enumerated in that compact; I Stale or tho United States within the gift of the
and that in case of a deliberate, palputle, and; people. I will not give them up ; I will not re- threat of your meeting can never come to soon
dangerous exercise of oilier powers, not granted tract them, though even Calhoun or McDuffie for my own inclination.
I you my opinions
I agreo then, with tho third Virginia Resolu
tion, which I have long made part if my politi
cal text book, and which reads thus :—
“ That this assembly,” (tho Virginia Legis
lature,) “ doth explicitly declare, that it views
the powers of the Federal Government, as re-
That EVERY STATE has a NATURAL
RIGHT, in cases not within tho compact, to
NULLIFY, of their OWN AUTHORITY,
all assumptions of power by other.?, WITHIN
THEIR LIMITS : that without this right,
they would he under tho dominion, absolute Rnd
unlimited, of whomsoever might exercise this
right of judgement for them.”
Here then, you have my opinion in full. Of
Mr. Jefferson's political creed I shall never be
afraid or ashamed. Whenever his doctrines
cease to be considered orthodox, hy the south
ern people, for they never were in odour in the
north, I feel entirely confident I am unfit to be
their representative, and the execution of the
by [tie said compact, the Slutes, who are the par
ties thereto,have the right, and are in duty bound,
to interpose, for arresting the progress oj the evil,
and for maintaining within ilietr respective lim
its the authorities, rights and liberties appertain
ing to them.”
I believe, with Mr. Madison, “ That when
resort can be had to no tribunal superior in au
thority to the parties, the parties, themselves,
must he the rightful judges, in the last resort,
whether the bargain made has been pursued or
violated." “That the States are the parties to the
constitutional compact, in their sovereign capa
city, and of necessity, that there can be no tri
bunal above their authority, and consequently
that as the pa ties to it, they must themselves de
cide, in th^ last result, such question us may he
of sufficient magnitude to justify their interposi
tion.”
I believe, therefore, thnt the Supreme Court
of the United Stntes is natof superior authority
to the States; and, with Mr. Jefferson, “ that
the judges of the same are not the ultimate ar
biters of all constitutional questions;” that it
would be dungcruus to grant them that power,
and would lead to the despotism of an Oligar
chy ;” and with him, I also believe, “ that the
ultimate arbiter is. the people, acting by llieir de
puties in conventions
I am, therefore, brought to the conclusion,
that the Legislature of tho state cannot, but
that the people of each state, acting hy their
deputies in convention, must, in all “cases which
are of sufficient magnitude to justify their inter
position,” determine upon the proper mode and
measure of redress, for every violation of the
constitution. And I cannot believe, with the
should approve and adopt them.
1 am, gentlemen, very respectfully, yours,
SEABORN JONES.
Messrs. Cumming, King and Slaughter.
SPARTA, 24th August, 1832.
-I have just received from you,
It is true that Mr. Jefferson has not pointed
out the mode nnd manner of nnllyfying a law;
but this must bo left to tho wisdom and discre
tion of the state whose rights aro invaded hy
tho assumed power, nnd must he as various as
the acts aro varied that violate tho ciinstitution.
Any plan, I enro not what it is, that rids the
effectually produce nlf theso events as (ho ease
I have just mentioned ?
The second instance was tho enso of Tassels.
Indian Tribes. Tho tariff act is said to rest
upon the right to regulate commerce w ith foreign
nations. Now mark, both of these pow ers are
A mandate was sent from the supremo Court of found side hy side, in the 8th section of the 1st
the United States, to suspend his execution until ; article of tho federal constitution. Suppose both
he could he heard before that Court on a writ of j laws, for tho first time, had hern passed ot tho
error. What said ihe legislature ? last Congress. The first, containing a provis-
“Resolved, That the Governor and every oth- > ion that the Cherokee nation of Indians within
or officer of this state disregard any and every the limits of Georgia, wns an independent na-
Gcntlemen
as a Committee of tho citizens of Richmond j state of the oppressive measure, is a nullifica-
county, your circular of the 20th instant, re- tion of that measure. To nulliliy is simply
questing me to communicate through you to nothing more nor less tlwn to render null and
your constitutents, my “ sentiments in regard to j void. All unconstitutional laws are null and
nullification.” The answer shall be as brief and
explicit us the enquiry. I do not believe nul
lification to bo either a peaceable or efficient
remedy against tho oppressions of the tariff) and
I ain entirely opposed to it.
With sentiments of highest respect, your
ohdt’t. serv’t.
CHARLES EATON HAYNES.
Messrs. Cumming, King and Slaughter.
Washington, (Wilkes)August 6,1832.
Gentlemen,—The people of Richmond, hav
ing exercised the truly democratic right of end
ing upon candidates for their suffrages, to de
clare their sentiments in regard to Nullification;
I will express mine by adopting the words of
one of their resolutions. I believe “the doctrine
false in theory,” anil think, “that in practice, it
would prove most disastrous to our country.”
Such was my conclusion after having plten-
tively read and ronsidered the exposition of the
Vice President and all that has been written in
favor of Nullification by other gentlemen in
South-Carolina, in connection with the Virginia
and Kentucky resolutions of 1798—the report
of Mr. Madison in 1799—the writings of Mr.
void. Is this objected to? I presume not.
Then your meeting, in its very first resolution,
has declared that the tariff art is “ unjest und in
consistent with the spirit of the constitution.”
Is it too much to say that an unjust law, one in
consistent with the spirit of the constitution,
ought to be null and void? As much us this
doctrine is now derided, I affirm, without the
fear of contradiction, that it is the very doctrine
upon which Georgia has acted from the founda
tion of her government. And I wil] now prove
it. I luy dow n these positions:
1st. Thnt an unconstitutional law is NO
LAW', and no man or community is bound to
obey it, nay they are bound to resist it, for every
inan is sworn to support the constitution.
2d. A law “ unjust and inconsistent with the
spirit of the constitution,” is a violation of the
constitution, because it is a perversion of that
instrument, a perversion is u breach of its inten
tion, and according to all rules of construction,
legal or moral, the intention must govern.
3d. Thnt the General government can pass no
law for which it does not find an authority in
thh constitution, mid that if it does, it is
no more binding upon tiic states than if passed
mandate und process thnt has been or shall he
served upon him or them, proceeding from tho
supreme court of the United Ftatcs, for the pur
pose of arresting any of the criminal law s of this
state.”
Resolved, That the Govcmo/, with all thoforce
nnd means placed at his command, resist and
repel nny nnd every invasion from w hatever quar
ter, upon the administration of the criminal laws
of this state.”
What language can he stronger? And do not
the resolutions imply the probability of a conflict
that the State might have to battle it with the
General Government! But when the consti
tutional rights of a slate arc violated what ether
alternative is left ? We read from the lessens
of the Revolution tlmt the motto of our forefa
thers was liberty or death,and so far,I am proud
to say the conduct of Georgia has evinced to tho
world a noble vindication of the maxim.
In reference to the third instance, 1 must beg
leave again to reiterate the .enquiry to your
meeting, “ what aro its sentiments in regard” to
tho political course of Governor Lumpkin? For
whatever may he their objections to that of Gov
ernor Troup, so for as relates to these doctrines,
he has been fully supported hy the present Gov'
ernor. At tho Inst session of tho legislature,
Governor Lumpkin communicated to that body,
that he had received two citations commanding
the State of Georgia to appear in tho supreme
court, to show causo why the judgments render
ed in our state court against Worcester and But
ler, should not be set aside. What said the Gov
ernor on that occasion ? That which ought to
command the admiration of every friend of state
rights.. “ Any nttempt (said he) to infringe the
evident right of the state to govern the entire
population within its territorial limits,and to pun
ish all offences committed against its laws, with
in those limits, (due regard being had to the ea
ses expressly incepted by the constitution of tho
tion, and not subject to tho laws of Georgia.'
The second, containing u provision that the peo
ple of Georgia should pay u tux to the northern
capitalists to protect their manufactures. What
would Georgia do with the first law? Need I
answer tlmt she has already nullified precisely
such a law, in the present intercourse law, and
the derision founded thereon. If then she would
nullity tiio first law , can there he a sensible dif
ference, in point of effect or principle, between
that and the last ? It is said their difference is
in their consequences, the first applies to a sin
gle state, the other to all the states : and pray
what has one sovereign stnto to do with tho
rights of other sovereign states in their seperute
capacities I It is not recolloctrd that one state
lias nothing to do with knottier, only in the
stipulated articles that have confederated them
together, and so soon as tho confederated gov
ernment passes u law out of these articles,
each state throws itself upon its original sep-
erate rights, and may employ whatever means
it pleases to prevent the operation of that law,
or if it chooses it may submit to its authority.
Tho other states may desire the protective sys
tem, indeed more than two thirds clamor for i|. (
tan this be any good reason why Georgia shall
submit to it.
Suppose all (lie other States, like Louisiana
nnd Kentucky, should he bought up and bccomo
reconciled to the late act, cun it be contended
that Ge-wgia must become so too? Does it net
occur to every mind that there can be no possi
ble difference between robbing tho States, by
piece meal, of (heir constitutional rights, or do
ing it in one general attack upon the whole sis
terhood? The rcasoqing that would aftemptto
make a difference will establish this position. If
a refiian attacks a single individual, hq must re
pel him immediately, but it ho attacks him in
company with twenty-three others, sixteen of
wheia arc willing te be robbed, and tho other
